I'd love to see some kind of unique solution to the league that considers the size of the US and Canada and allows for pro/rel.
Fact is, if small-market clubs have the quality (and the support and the money), they should be able to come up.

In short, MLS would have:
4 Divisions split by time zone and geography (1-2 time zones each) with 10 teams each, 40 teams total, bottom team from each division goes down, while the best USL team in that same general geographical area comes up.
-USL has to match geographical format

 first half of MLS season: home and home vs 9 other teams in your division =18 games

 second half of MLS season: top 2 from each division (8 teams) play across divisions home and home = 14 games
-remaining 8 teams from each division play home and home again
- 32 games is 2 fewer games for regular season, which is probably the smart choice since MLS is choosing to play too many games during int'l breaks

longest season possible: 37 games for MLS Cup participants, thus shortening the season slightly, and leaves a little more room for CCL
(current longest season possible for an MLS club is 40 or 41 games, too long)

If your club is 10th in your time zone/region, you get relegated for the best USL club in your region, and tough titty.

mmeeCulver City, CA

Post #7

Sunday June 18, 2017 6:06am

Joined Mar 2014
Total Posts: 2,147

.....and 30 mins after I write this, the LAG - HD game ends with another case of total home cooking. Houston got absolutely robbed- disgusting.

MSantoine

Post #8

Sunday June 18, 2017 12:32pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723

Original post from mmee

cross-post:

I'd love to see some kind of unique solution to the league that considers the size of the US and Canada and allows for pro/rel.
Fact is, if small-market clubs have the quality (and the support and the money), they should be able to come up.

In short, MLS would have:
4 Divisions split by time zone and geography (1-2 time zones each) with 10 teams each, 40 teams total, bottom team from each division goes down, while the best USL team in that same general geographical area comes up.
-USL has to match geographical format

 first half of MLS season: home and home vs 9 other teams in your division =18 games

 second half of MLS season: top 2 from each division (8 teams) play across divisions home and home = 14 games
-remaining 8 teams from each division play home and home again
- 32 games is 2 fewer games for regular season, which is probably the smart choice since MLS is choosing to play too many games during int'l breaks

longest season possible: 37 games for MLS Cup participants, thus shortening the season slightly, and leaves a little more room for CCL
(current longest season possible for an MLS club is 40 or 41 games, too long)

If your club is 10th in your time zone/region, you get relegated for the best USL club in your region, and tough titty.

If I follow this correctly you want there to be 40 mos teams and another 40 or so teams capable (stadium, fans, sponsors) to be in mls. We don't have more than 30 truly viable teams and you want 80. That's a long ways off my friend.

platterJacksonville, FL

Post #9

Sunday June 18, 2017 5:48pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 97

The most likely path toward pro-rel in US Soccer would be for NASL to strengthen, forcing MLS to eventually merge with them. This isn't unprecedented in american sports, NBA/ABA, NFL/AFL, and NL/AL all did this in the major sports. Only difference would be the merger would create a two tier system. This is why I'm for supporting NASL teams as much as possible, even though the league seems to be in tatters currently.

skanglesDC

Post #10

Sunday June 18, 2017 8:45pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 5,401

Why would MLS merge with NASL as opposed to just picking off NASL's best run teams and creating their own MLS1 and MLS2 divisions? MLS has already poached Minnesota and Montreal from NASL, they could grab a team like Indy without taking on teams like Miami, the Cosmos, San Francisco and Orange County that don't really fit with the MLS' geographic presence. MLS1 and MLS2 would also allow them to poach from the USL and given the co-D2 status that approach would make more sense for MLS than a merger.

That said MLS1 and MLS2 isn't going to happen anytime soon, if ever.

mmeeCulver City, CA

Post #11

Sunday June 18, 2017 9:25pm

Joined Mar 2014
Total Posts: 2,147

Original post from MSantoine

If I follow this correctly you want there to be 40 mos teams and another 40 or so teams capable (stadium, fans, sponsors) to be in mls. We don't have more than 30 truly viable teams and you want 80. That's a long ways off my friend.

However wacky my idea is, it does NOT require 80 teams.

The bottom third of those 40 MLS teams are basically minnows.
So it's sorta like combining MLS with the top of USL to make 4 divisions of 10, in order to solve geography, travel and time zone problems.http://www.uslsoccer.com/usl-standings

Also, the structure below that does NOT have to be another 40 teams, I don't know where you're getting that idea, and could easily include all of the academy teams.

We don't have to work pro/rel just like a bunch of European countries that are Texas-size or smaller.

db707

Post #12

Sunday June 18, 2017 9:35pm

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 837

The NASL is very far away from being a factor at the moment. The NASL's mismanagement in its early years while MLS was growing strongly really took away any opportunity for a full merger that would create pro/rel, if such an opportunity even could have existed. As you said skangles, MLS can just take teams/markets they want. Indy (NASL attendance leader this year) and North Carolina (third) are thus in the discussion for expansion, but they're still outside shots. Miami is second in attendance and MLS is still (presumably) getting the Beckham team there. Every other team is averaging crowds of

skanglesDC

Post #13

Sunday June 18, 2017 10:36pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 5,401

Yep, good point on the Railhawks (or whatever they are called now). If I worked for MLS, I would really only want Indy, Carolina and Edmonton from NASL. I say Edmonton because if MLS were to expand to the point of MLS1 and MLS2 I would presume that they would want to lock down the Canadian market in the process so Edmonton and Ottawa would be no brainers.

mmeeCulver City, CA

Post #14

Sunday June 18, 2017 10:44pm

Joined Mar 2014
Total Posts: 2,147

Also, the exact teams counts and division counts aren't what I'm lobbying for in my proposed system. It's the "local season + super-season + playoffs" that I'm arguing for.
Only a few teams move on to the super-season per division.

It solves a lot of geographical BS without having the #1 East play the #1 West only once during the season, which is what we have now. In the second half of the season, the best teams in the country play home-and-home. The local teams who don't qualify for that play their regional rivals more, they play to stay up, and they develop players.

So the Pacific division would be something like:
Galaxy
LAFC
Orange County
Quakes
Reno
Sacramento
SF Deltas
Sounders
Timbers
Whitecaps
(just for the sake of argument)

In the league below that, you'd have a San Diego team, a Las Vegas team, and a bunch of other California cities, along with the academy teams. If that lower league is topped by a non-academy team, pro/rel happens, and probably SF Deltas or Orange County moves down.
Conversely, if San Diego or whoever can't top a table with LAG II and Sounders II and so on, they don't move up. Stay classy, San Diego.

The Mountain Time Zone would probably be the weak one BUT it could always be adjusted to include some of the Central Time Zone teams. Maybe it'd be Mountain plus TX and KS.

db707

Post #15

Monday June 19, 2017 12:18am

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 837

Original post from skangles

Yep, good point on the Railhawks (or whatever they are called now). If I worked for MLS, I would really only want Indy, Carolina and Edmonton from NASL. I say Edmonton because if MLS were to expand to the point of MLS1 and MLS2 I would presume that they would want to lock down the Canadian market in the process so Edmonton and Ottawa would be no brainers.

Don't know why it kept cutting off my post, but whatever. I meant to say no NASL team after Indy, Miami and North Carolina draws >5k a game. And I think if Nashville gets off to a good start next year, MLS will favor Nashville over Raleigh/Durham if they put another team in the South.